Jharkhand High Court
Ganesh Dubey vs The Union Of India Through C.B.I on 6 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 670 of 2023
Ganesh Dubey ... Appellant
-Versus-
The Union of India through C.B.I. ... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I.
Ms. Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I.
-----
03/06.10.2023 Admit.
2. Call for the Lower Court Records.
3. Issue Notice. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI
waives notice on behalf of the CBI.
I.A. No. 8872 of 2023
4. The said I.A. has been filed for confirmation of provisional bail
granted to the appellant vide order dated 28.08.2023 for a period of two
months during pendency of the present appeal.
5. The appellant has been convicted for charge under Section 120(B)
read with Section 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian Penal
Code by the learned Special Judge, C.B.I.-II, (A.H.D.), Ranchi in R.C. Case
No.48(A)/1996 vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
28.08.2023 and he has been sentenced to R.I. for three years and fine of
Rs.20,000/-. Further, a common sentence for Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of
the Indian Penal Code and R.I. of three years and fine of Rs.5,000/- has
been imposed and all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently
and in default of payment of fine, he has been further directed to undergo
S.I. for six months separately for each set off offences.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
appellant was a Director of the firm namely M/s Angel Medichem India Pvt.
Ltd., New Delhi and he supplied the material as per the requirement of the
Department of Animal Husbandry or from the office of the DAHO, Ranchi,
but in spite of that the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the
appellant without applying his judicial mind. He further submits that the
appellant is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case
because the CBI has pressurized the appellant to give false evidence
against the said firm and on denial, he has been falsely implicated in the
case. He also submits that the learned Court has wrongly shown the firm of
the appellant with M/s Janta Veterinary, Ranchi while the firm M/s Janta
Veterinary was one of the distributor of the firm of the appellant.
7. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI submits that
the case of the appellant has been discussed in paras-43 and 58 of the
judgment and the allegations have been found to be established. However,
learned counsel for the CBI does not dispute that the appellant has been
imposed maximum sentence of three years and granted provisional bail.
8. Having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the
appellant and CBI and in the facts and circumstances noted above, the
provisional bail granted to the appellant vide order dated 28.08.2023
passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI-II, (AHD), Ranchi, in R.C Case
No. 48(A)/1996, is confirmed, subject to deposit of 50% of the fine amount
before the learned Court and if not wanted in connection with any other
case. The appellant would not leave the country without permission of the
learned Trial Court. He would also submit his passport, if any, before the
learned Trial Court and the appellant and his bailors shall not change their
addresses or mobile numbers without permission of the learned Trial Court.
9. Accordingly, I.A. No.8872 of 2023 is disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
